Featured contributor DavidNYC at DailyKos attempts to manufacture a smear campaign against a Kos supported candidate (Paul Hackett) and pin it on Republican candidate Jean Schmidt. Of course he's omitted the facts that refute prove his charge is blatantly dishonest. Here's the meat of the Kos quote:

Eric Minamyer, an adviser to Jean Schmidt (R), sees fit to question Paul Hackett's service to this country in Iraq. How dare he.

...So, memo to the GOP: We won't let you get away with Swift Boating another heroic Democratic war veteran. And we won't let you desecrate the memories of the eleven civil affairs men and women who've made the ultimate sacrifice for this country. Shame on you for even trying.

Anyone willing to do even a moderate amount of reading can determine the following:

Eric Minamyer is a veteran of the Iraq war as well - a point conveniently omitted from DavidNYC's story (as was a link to Minamyer's site).

Minamyer is upfront in discussing his service in the Naval IG and JAG, neither a combat role.

Minamyer ran for the Republican nomination and lost, and is now supporting Schmidt.

Minamyer's question about Hackett's service are directly related to a Hackett campaign commercial that (according to Minamyer) implies he commanded Marines in combat. Here's his direct question concerning the ad:

Major Hackett is a Civil Affairs Officer. His commercial refers to "following his marines" to Iraq. What does that mean? Did he command any marines? Who? To whom did he report? What were his duties exactly?

Clearly it's the Kos coeditor who should be shamed for "desecrating memories" by dragging unrelated deaths into a simple question about a campaign commercial.

Update: Hackett responds via a news story. Minamyer posts the response and stands corrected. Those accusing Minamyer of a "Swift Boat" attack continue to distort his simple questions, and distort his role in the Schmidt campaign, which he clears up at Ohio 2nd.

s9 you missed this point (or more accurately you fell for the Kos spin) it wasn't an unsubstantiated claim, it was a question (or actually a series of questions).

In light of your Politician A line, imagine that Politician A had been a JAG lawyer. If Politician B notes that position is not normally associated combat or leading combat troops (while granting that anyone serving in Iraq is in harms way) how is it wrong to ask about?

It's not.

Go read all of the posts and show me were he's anything other that totally respectful of Hackett's service.

It's startling that liberals cannot recognize a war veteran from a fraud, and that they'd to this day -- some, at least -- insist on maintaing the charade that John Kerry was a war veteran, and that the Swift Vets' statements and stories were, by comparison, disrespectful, inaccurate, unmerited.

More of why a Democrat Executive/Administration would be so tragic, in my view, with our world conditions. I can just see Castro now, in the White House, a guest at coffee...

Seriously, the very premise in that very inaccurate statement, aside from the other characteristics you identify, is both shocking and awful in the lack of reality involved. And yet they still wonder why they're called "moonbats."

Sorry, dropped copy (^^)...should have written, "...that John Kerry is a HEROIC veteran..."

I realize he served but the four months' experience and many facts now unearthed about prior, during and after that hardly qualify as heroic actions by a heroic individual, but dishonorable behavior by a dishonorable person -- requiring Presidential pardon just to carry forward for Kerry.

I think that the liberal definition of "heroic veteran" is someone with five Code Pink demonstrations under their belt and/or Jane Fonda's bumpy ride on a large calibre artillery. And/or John Kerry meeting in Paris with the enemy while an enlisted man, to collaborate on ideas.

Like I've said before, the left is so incredibly dishonest their constituents don't even notice. s9 just keeps on proving it. He's so used to dishonesty he even defends it. You'd think at some point he'd realize how much time he spends trying to justify the lies would send him a message. You'd think.

Old "Killing Our Soldiers" (KOS) is drifting farther and farther into the world of insanity. Won't be long until the boys in the white coats carrying butterfly nets, and them funny coats with lot of buckles, will be after him.

I served, dickhead. 20 years, 2 months, and 8 days of active duty (some of it more active than others). Does that now disqualify me as a 'Yellow Republican'?

And, more to the point, what does my service have to do with my political opinions? I don't get to comment on matters or arms unless I've served? That's the new bone fides into a conversation of anything military?

Facts and truth have never stood in the way of a democrat lie. Nor have the safety and lives of those serving ever stopped them from spewing out lies and misinformation that provides aid and comfort to those in battle against US forces.

I too have served my country, during the time that should be called The Southeast Asia War Games. A war that a democrat president REFUSED to allow the military to win. johnson was proud of saying that a soldier in Viet Nam couldn't even (modified comment) visit the john without his prior approval.

Nice way to change to discussion by dropping an ad hominom attack in the mix. Hackett has been playing up his service which is fine. However, he has also been running some very misleading commercials (borderline dishonest). In the commercials he acts like he supports our actions in Iraq. Heck, he even included Bush in his commercial. However, he made it very clear in the primary that he is opposed to the War on Terror. He realized that the moonbat act which was successful in the primary would not play well in a general election in southern Ohio which is a conservative, pro-American part of the country.

PS: Before you get your panties in a wad, I served 25 years active duty. However, I strongly resent your implication that my three brothers who did not join the military (or anyone else for that matter) don't have a right to discuss any damn thing they please.

Idiot Burt aside, I think this is a path that Eric Minamyer shouldn't have gone down. Remember, guys, unlike the rest of the services, Marines are ALWAYS infantry first. Anyone getting through TBS and becoming a Marine officer is given the benifit of the doubt in my book...

(Burt: I also served so I guess I'm allowed to comment on this right?)

Well...at least 11 Civil Affairs officers serving in Iraq have been killed due to hosile action. Hackett served as one in two of tyhe dodgiest places in Iraq: Ramadi and Fallujah. The latter was a few months after our sustained assault there.

Civil Affiars officers frequently are required to spend time out in the community. liasing with local officials, and dealiog with the local population. Thay have to wear full battle gear, and are escorted by armed patrols.

They do not spend the vast majority of their duty time hanging out in the secure Green Zopne or on a secure military base.

Hackett was, according to one of his Marine buddies, involved in at least one insurgent fire incident.

Also, he VOLUNTEERED to serve over there, despite having misgivings about the necessity of the war.

Questioning his service is outrageous. By anyone. And, Jean Schmidt has yet to distance hersefl from Manamyer'scomments or even say she thinks they are out of bounds or wrong. No. She intends to benefit from his attacks on Hackett. and then have dishonest hacks like you claim she has nothing to do with them.

The guy served, honorably. IF he's inflating his contribution, he should be called on it. Otherwise, it's a cheap shot. Since Minamyer does NOT offer any proof of an inflated record, it should not have been brought up.

For the record, I served in the Army for 20 years, during Grenada, Lebanon, Panama, the Korean overthrow, and a lot of other such incidents. I once heard hostile gunfire in the distance. I never faced enemy fire. I never claim to be a veteran. I reserve that for those who HAVE
had to be at risk. So, should I run for office, will I have to face subtle accusations, because I never bled? Bah!

"This is not about what type of risk Hackett had to face in Iraq, it's about how dishonest he will be with his constituency to get elected."

Cmpared to dishonest slazeball Jean Schmidt, the constituents of Ohio's 2nd Congressional district would be phenomenally well-served with someone who has the charcter of Paul Hackett. If the worst you can say about him is athat he engaged in a bit of puffery in a campaign ad, then he'd a hell of a lot better than 99% of the politicians out there today.

Ah yes, well I served for 22 years in the Navy, 27 in the Air Force, 54 in the Army, 227 in the Marines, and 23214 in the Coast Guard. I was shot to death 748 times, stabbed to death 96 times, blown up 77 times, and beaten to death with a sledgehammer twice!!!

[Hackett] arrived in Iraq in August, and took over convoy commander duties and helped organize the payroll of Ramadi-area government workers. In November, he volunteered to help secure the eastern entry into Fallujah while coalition forces swept through the city.

"I certainly did not do the heaviest of the lifting," he said. "But on the convoy, we were ambushed on more than one occasion."

If he performed "convoy commander duties", and was "ambushed on more than one occasion", that says to me that he did, in fact, command marines in combat operations. Unless you want to accuse Stars and Stripes of liberal media bias, anyway.

Just because you served your country doesn't mean you can't be an asshole. (I'm talking about Minamyer as well as those posting here questioning Hackett's duty).

verb (transitive): Swiftboat

(1) To egregiously lie, distort, misdirect, and dissemble about the record of an individual in order to cast doubt on their qualifications. e.g., The Republicans hired known liars to swiftboat John Kerry.

I am sick unto death of campaigns questioning ANY candidate's military service. If the candidate donned a uniform in service to his country, his service and patriotism should be off limits. If the candidate claimed to have served in a situation where he obviously didn't, military records and the Internet will make it fairly easy to prove. But these whisper campaigns have got to stop. It is sickening and disgusting.

Military service, no matter the soldier's political affiliation, is HONORABLE and should be revered. How can we expect the military to recruit effectively when potential enlistees see how politics is used to spit upon the dignity of that service?

Today's politicians are now doing what they accused the hippies of doing during the '60s!

"Minamyer's question about Hackett's service are directly related to a Hackett campaign commercial that (according to Minamyer) implies he commanded Marines in combat. Here's his direct question concerning the ad:"

It was a cheesey Swift Boat smear attempt. Since Hackett demonstrated that he did lead marines in combat, and Minamyer is not high enough in the culture of corruption, he couldn't get Karl Rove to back the smear. Minamyer has since backed down on this dirty trick.

Spent 19 months in Vietnam. Left some of my blood on the ground there. Means nothing. I am a Democrat. I am glad the Republicans won the last election and have both houses of congress. A replay of 1929 is just around the corner. Its cause will be the Republican attack on the middle class for the last 25 years. We have to get the selfishness, greed and hatred that the Republicans live for out of our system. We Democrats will take over and we will rebuild the middle class and bring honor back to the political realm. The Republicans believe in who has the gold rules and the Democrats believe in the golden rule. I wish everyone well in their life

"I understand that Hackett did not participate in combat at all. It is still dangerous over there as I can personally attest. Let's just not act as though we led marines in combat if we did not, okay."

All the stuff above about how Captain Minamyer was just asking questions is a bunch of BS.